HB 2016-1057 - The Criminal Justice Act of 2016 (GOES TO SENATE)

[NeverAgain]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[NeverAgain]

continued from previous post

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor(s)NeverAgain (President Truman

[Enduro]

Looks alright to me, anyone seeing something I'm not?

[Anna Komnene]

Could we get an explanation on the basic idea behind this bill?  Since this is more of a bill legislating on actual Atlasia players instead of imaginary constituents, it seems a bit... heavy handed to put it mildly.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

My thanks to the Speaker for bringing this to the floor.

This bill is an updated version of the Criminal Justice Reform Act in place before the adoption of the Fourth Constitution. With the exception of a few references to the now-defunct Third Constitution, it has not been amended in any significant way, because I think that's something that ought to be done by the people's representatives in the public eye. I fully expect there to be a hearty debate and many amendments before this goes to the Senate, and that is how it should be.

[Enduro]

Could we get an explanation on the basic idea behind this bill?  Since this is more of a bill legislating on actual Atlasia players instead of imaginary constituents, it seems a bit... heavy handed to put it mildly.

Because we can only make laws limiting the peasants.

[Anna Komnene]

Could we get an explanation on the basic idea behind this bill?  Since this is more of a bill legislating on actual Atlasia players instead of imaginary constituents, it seems a bit... heavy handed to put it mildly.

Because we can only make laws limiting the peasants.

I'm not sure what that means.  I just meant that I think it's important to remember that we're all fellow forumites and that it's a game.  I don't really like the idea of labeling other Atlasians as "terrorists" or "traitors" like the language of this bill uses.  I did take a closer read through just now though, and I guess most of the things in the bill are things we really don't want people doing.  I'm not sure if anyone has ever done some of this stuff.  Maybe I'm just naive, but anyway, I guess it's still good to have the laws on the books.

I still hope that in most cases people can work things out among themselves and not need to banish someone for 2 years or whatever.

[Enduro]

Could we get an explanation on the basic idea behind this bill?  Since this is more of a bill legislating on actual Atlasia players instead of imaginary constituents, it seems a bit... heavy handed to put it mildly.

Because we can only make laws limiting the peasants.

I'm not sure what that means.  I just meant that I think it's important to remember that we're all fellow forumites and that it's a game.  I don't really like the idea of labeling other Atlasians as "terrorists" or "traitors" like the language of this bill uses.  I did take a closer read through just now though, and I guess most of the things in the bill are things we really don't want people doing.  I'm not sure if anyone has ever done some of this stuff.  Maybe I'm just naive, but anyway, I guess it's still good to have the laws on the books.

I still hope that in most cases people can work things out among themselves and not need to banish someone for 2 years or whatever.

I was making a joke because your post made it seem like you only wanted to pass laws that apply to the imaginary players.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I'm not sure if anyone has ever done some of this stuff.

Unfortunately, yes, most of the crimes named in Section 2 have been committed at one point or another. In the past two years alone, clauses (a), (b), (c), (e), (f), (h), (j), (k), (l), and (n) have all been at the root of major public controversies. Notable examples include Sir Nick deleting dozens of threads from the Northeast Assembly and vandalizing the wiki to get back at Sawx, JoMCaR creating something like six sock accounts and registering all of them in Atlasia, and a Justice Department witch hunt against Yankee and Classic Conservative aimed at silencing two of the most outspoken advocates for Constitutional reform. JoMCaR was convicted of (c) and sentenced to a six month ban from the game; Al and Sir Nick deregistered to escape prosecution for (n) and (h), respectively.

[NeverAgain]

Okay folks. This looks good to me. 24 hours more for final statements, then let's vote!

[Blair]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'd like to hear/see/understand a bit more about this aspect of the bill- out of all the offences it's the most likely to happen, and I think one of the most important.

Would it be worth having it's own section, or even its own bill in order to clear it up?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Undue pressure should be defined clearly otherwise this is an invitation for frivolous lawsuits over mere GOTV operations.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Undue pressure should be defined clearly otherwise this is an invitation for frivolous lawsuits over mere GOTV operations.

A very good point. I'd prefer that phrase to be struck altogether and replaced with a specific set of offenses (for instance, blackmail and threats of retribution).

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Undue pressure should be defined clearly otherwise this is an invitation for frivolous lawsuits over mere GOTV operations.

A very good point. I'd prefer that phrase to be struck altogether and replaced with a specific set of offenses (for instance, blackmail and threats of retribution).

Yes, exactly.

The biggest problem in this past cycle was generated by lack of clear definition of legal terms. We shouldn't expand that problem, but do everything possible to eliminate it. In doing so we will avoid people falling through the cracks or alternatively, people getting unfairly impacted (depending on your perspective), going forward.

Plus one has to draw from experiences. In he past I have had people flip out over simple GOTV PMs, and therefore such a vague text is an open invitation for such to lead to drawn out court cases and the like.

[Mike Thick]

I share the concerns of Yankee and Truman, and will introduce an amendment to resolve the issue later today, but everything else seems pretty good.

[NeverAgain]

I share the concerns of Yankee and Truman, and will introduce an amendment to resolve the issue later today, but everything else seems pretty good.

I will wait another 24 hours for your amendment, before introducing my own auto-friendly one .

[Mike Thick]

I share the concerns of Yankee and Truman, and will introduce an amendment to resolve the issue later today, but everything else seems pretty good.

I will wait another 24 hours for your amendment, before introducing my own auto-friendly one .

Fack, forgot about this

[Mike Thick]

I propose the following amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[NeverAgain]

Completely Friendly, and very much needed.

24 hours for debate, before final vote!

[Blair]

Peebs introduced this as an amendment to the Federal Election Bill but I'd like to propose this amendment to the bill, and get someone to suspend the rules so that we can move onto a final vote

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

Peebs introduced this as an amendment to the Federal Election Bill but I'd like to propose this amendment to the bill, and get someone to suspend the rules so that we can move onto a final vote

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I will sponsor this, if necessary.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I support the amendment offered by Representative Bessell. Likewise, I agree that the Blair-Peebs amendment is a necessary addition to our voter registration laws, though it's not clear to me where this fits into the rest of the bill.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

Bump.

[NeverAgain]

I will open this up for a final 48-hour vote.

[Goldwater]

AYE